• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Public sector unions should NOT invite ministers to their conferences.


RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
This week the representatives of the Gardaí - the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI) and the Garda Representative Association (GRA) - are holding their conference. Next week it'll be the turn of the teachers unions in the INTO, the ASTI & the TUI.

At all four conferences the Minister for Justice (Shatter) and the Minister for Education & Skills (Quinn) will be invited by the leaders of the unions/representatives to address the conference.

The Minister will sit with the union leaders for the entire duration.

But why should these organisations invite their relevant minister as each minister has history of ignoring these representatives and treating them with contempt?

For instance Quinn announced changes which effectively will lead to the abolition of the Junior Certificate and only told the union leaders an hour before his speech. Parents representatives were also ignored. Shatter has closed police stations in a similar manner.

Ignoring these Ministers would, in a way, make them appear irrelevant.

They (the Ministers) have nothing to contribute to the provision of services in education and policing except to come cap in hand to the unions looking for money.
 

davoid

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,711
This week the representatives of the Gardaí - the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI) and the Garda Representative Association (GRA) - are holding their conference. Next week it'll be the turn of the teachers unions in the INTO, the ASTI & the TUI.

At all four conferences the Minister for Justice (Shatter) and the Minister for Education & Skills (Quinn) will be invited by the leaders of the unions/representatives to address the conference.

The Minister will sit with the union leaders for the entire duration.

But why should these organisations invite their relevant minister as each minister has history of ignoring these representatives and treating them with contempt?

For instance Quinn announced changes which effectively will lead to the abolition of the Junior Certificate and only told the union leaders an hour before his speech. Parents representatives were also ignored. Shatter has closed police stations in a similar manner.

Ignoring these Ministers would, in a way, make them appear irrelevant.
They (the Ministers) have nothing to contribute to the provision of services in education and policing except to come cap in hand to the unions looking for money.
So the irrelevant ignoring the irrelevant?
 

RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
So the irrelevant ignoring the irrelevant?
Shoulda known you'd be along. ;)

I'd hardly call those providing the services irrelevant.

You'll find the most irrelevant who are paid by the state are usually the highest paid (excluding doctors, consultants and other medical staff) . . You know - Jokers like Quinn & Shatter.
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
24,203
This has to be one of the dumbest OPs on this site...

What's your plan Robert?

Cut off all contact?

You may be deeply immersed in union La La Land and think that what unions want must be given all the time every time...

Not all of us live in union La La Land however... and thankfully for now at least we still live in a kind of democracy and not a union dictatorship...

Even by your standards this is one p!ss poor thread...
 

davoid

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,711
Shoulda known you'd be along. ;)

I'd hardly call those providing the services irrelevant.

You'll find the most irrelevant who are paid by the state are usually the highest paid (excluding doctors, consultants and other medical staff) . . You know - Jokers like Quinn & Shatter.
When I say ireelevant I'm referring to the beards who love to disgorge themselves of their longwinded verbosity at the drinkins & gabfests they call annual conferences
 

davoid

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
9,711
This has to be one of the dumbest OPs on this site...

What's your plan Robert?

Cut off all contact?

You may be deeply immersed in union La La Land and think that what unions want must be given all the time every time...

Not all of us live in union La La Land however... and thankfully for now at least we still live in a kind of democracy and not a union dictatorship...

Even by your standards this is one p!ss poor thread...
Yes, Robert believes that the best way to convince someone that you have a case is to ignore them.

Another robertsh1te.
 

RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
This has to be one of the dumbest OPs on this site...

What's your plan Robert?

Cut off all contact?

You may be deeply immersed in union La La Land and think that what unions want must be given all the time every time...

Not all of us live in union La La Land however... and thankfully for now at least we still live in a kind of democracy and not a union dictatorship...

Even by your standards this is one p!ss poor thread...
My standards?

You have no standards beyond writing profanities and shíte in virtually every sentence.

The point I've made is clear. Unions should just ignore relevant ministers.
 

RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
Yes, Robert believes that the best way to convince someone that you have a case is to ignore them.

Another robertsh1te.
Aren't you aware of the fact that unions are being ignored?
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
24,203
My standards?

You have no standards beyond writing profanities and shíte in virtually every sentence.

The point I've made is clear. Unions should just ignore relevant ministers.
Your 'point' is complete boll*cks.

I'm not sure you're the full shilling at all...
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,845
Ignoring these Ministers would, in a way, make them appear irrelevant.
It would appear that way the first time because whoever did it would get nice media coverage. Then the second time it would be mentioned in passing. And then the third time it wouldn't be mentioned at all. And the union leaders would speak to their attendees and nobody else. And the minister would continue to make decisions they're elected to make, they just wouldn't have to spend time giving the cursory polite speech to pretend they're listening at the union meetings.

Garda main points: We want more pay and more people
Teachers main points: We want more pay and more people
Nurses main points: We want more pay and more people

There. I've just saved Shatter, Quinn and Reilly hours of their lives.
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
24,203
You're a few sandwiches short of a picnic Robert...

And God knows I ignore your idiotic ramblings most of the time...

Unfortunately this OP was just too feckin' stupid to let slide...
 

Keith-M

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
15,779
Website
www.allkindsofeverything.ie
So the irrelevant ignoring the irrelevant?

Exactly. The politicians and public sector trade unions leaders were happy to cozy up to one another in the boom years and screw the taxpayer. Now times are tough and there's a bit of break-down in the love-in.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
52,066
The PS should not have unions or a right to strike except for cases of dismissal or gross abuses. They have jobs for life unless they agree and when they retire they get gold plated redundancy packages. Even FDR - considered a Socialist in the US and who founded most of the PS there - was strongly opposed to a unionised PS. He realised the inherent conflict of interest when the PS could hold a govt to ransom which the private sector could not do.
 

RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
Your 'point' is complete boll*cks.

I'm not sure you're the full shilling at all...
Boll&cks, gobshîte, blah, blah, blah. . . .read over the rubbish you post.

I'd say you're incapable of embarrassing yourself.

Goodbye.
 

Rocky

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
8,550
This week the representatives of the Gardaí - the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI) and the Garda Representative Association (GRA) - are holding their conference. Next week it'll be the turn of the teachers unions in the INTO, the ASTI & the TUI.

At all four conferences the Minister for Justice (Shatter) and the Minister for Education & Skills (Quinn) will be invited by the leaders of the unions/representatives to address the conference.

The Minister will sit with the union leaders for the entire duration.

But why should these organisations invite their relevant minister as each minister has history of ignoring these representatives and treating them with contempt?

For instance Quinn announced changes which effectively will lead to the abolition of the Junior Certificate and only told the union leaders an hour before his speech. Parents representatives were also ignored. Shatter has closed police stations in a similar manner.

Ignoring these Ministers would, in a way, make them appear irrelevant.

They (the Ministers) have nothing to contribute to the provision of services in education and policing except to come cap in hand to the unions looking for money.
That seems pretty stupid as inevitably the Public Sector will just suffer more

The Ministers run the various department as set down in the Constitution. There is nothing the public sector can do without essentially try to seize power in a coup that would make them irrelevant. Ministers would just carry on as they are, if they weren't invited. The difference is the Unions would have no ability to influence them.
 

blokesbloke

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
23,296
My standards?

You have no standards beyond writing profanities and shíte in virtually every sentence.

The point I've made is clear. Unions should just ignore relevant ministers.
Oh dear.
 

RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
It would appear that way the first time because whoever did it would get nice media coverage. Then the second time it would be mentioned in passing. And then the third time it wouldn't be mentioned at all. And the union leaders would speak to their attendees and nobody else. And the minister would continue to make decisions they're elected to make, they just wouldn't have to spend time giving the cursory polite speech to pretend they're listening at the union meetings.

Garda main points: We want more pay and more people
Teachers main points: We want more pay and more people
Nurses main points: We want more pay and more people

There. I've just saved Shatter, Quinn and Reilly hours of their lives.
Well precisely. . If that's your opinion I wouldn't disagree with your last statement.

The charade of inviting the minister makes it appear to union representatives that they have clout. They don't.

There is nothing to be gained from inviting ministers to conferences.

All the ministers do is turn up and make a speech and then leave.
 

RobertW

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
20,483
That seems pretty stupid as inevitably the Public Sector will just suffer more

The Ministers run the various department as set down in the Constitution. There is nothing the public sector can do without essentially try to seize power in a coup that would make them irrelevant. Ministers would just carry on as they are, if they weren't invited. The difference is the Unions would have no ability to influence them.
Seizing power in a coup?. . . Hardly.

No negotiations occur at conferences. Nothing. Nada. There's no influencing to be done.

So why bother invite them there?
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,038
Seizing power in a coup?. . . Hardly.

No negotiations occur at conferences. Nothing. Nada. There's no influencing to be done.

So why bother invite them there?
If I were a minister I would simply refuse to go if the boorish behaviour of past conferences was anything to go by.
 

daveL

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
19,593
My standards?

You have no standards beyond writing profanities and shíte in virtually every sentence.

The point I've made is clear. Unions should just ignore relevant ministers.
lol
 
Top